the galah

i think your second post,clarifies your first. in other words, your latest post acknowledges duncan garner is the one that said she is saying that,whereas the lady never actually said that in the interview.

record keeping by racing authorities has supposedly been improved. i think thats true,but also think it could be classified as a bit of cosmetic changes as well. so nz racing authorities have tried,and now they give the impression of better traceablity. the harness horses they seem to classify as deregistered these days,dead or still registered.. what happens to the follow up record keeping after they have been notified as deregistered,i'm not sure. looking at ours ,we still have horses shown as deregistered grazing in paddocks. the mares are still shown as being current.the ones that have died are shown as dead.i suppose thats because we have notified them each year . so record keeping is reliant on the owners replying properly to hrnz request for information.. Micro chipping was introduced fo harness foals bred about 4 years ago and i think is also applicable from this year to any thorougbred foals bred. personally i'm not a fan of micro chipping. big racing stables may have micro chip readers,but people who are the ones who care for the horses after finsihing racing are unlikely to. So it makes it harder for them. is their a requirement that pet food places in the future notify racing authorities of the identication of the horses they process. Because if its only a optional,then that wouldn't create a proper picture. the micro chipping itself was sold to people as being a method for easier traceability,but you only have to look to the USA ,where you saw horse animal welfare groups lobbied hard against it, as they quite rightly said it made it more difficult for people to identify harness horses at horse sales where the pet food operators active.Some well known harness breeders over there actually do both freeze branding and micro chipping ,just so their ex racehorses could be identified more easily after finishing their racing. the whole topic is very complex.

i can understand why you have bad memories of taking that injured horse to an abbatoir for a friend.Some people can just switch off,but for others it leaves memories that they find hard to erase from their memory. I think people who work in such places also have to have become desensitised to the whole process. We had such an abbatoir in the area we once lived and i spoke to a young lady who had worked there,she told me she only lasted a month as it effected her too much to continue.Months later she said she still thought about it occasionally,and she was not a person who had ever had a horse. i had a neighbour who actually was the man who worked for them and came out to peoples properties and put them down on the property,before transporting the carcass to the abbatoir for processing. He was a really empathetic person which made the whole traumatic process easier. I'm sure having them put down on your own property is the best way to do it and that is what i recommend if anyone has to do it. In that province is also the blood processing farm ,where they take horses,male and female,take their blood regularly and send it off for processing overseas. There was big money in it for the company who did that. They looked after the horses well,but i was told by people who worked there, the horses tended to last for about 2- 3 years before they were no longer useful in that respect,due to the veins. the lady we have been talking about,says she was associated with stables and stirrups until last year,a rehoming place for harness horses. I see it was only about a week ago hrnz had on their website that stables and stirrups was no longer doing rehoming.people who do the rehoming thing really do a wonderful job. the likes of jackie law out woodend way,has helped find homes for so many. but the reality is,hrnz promote the rehoming places,but the rehoming places have no interest in horses over 12. Just last year we went looking for grazing.. After many months searching,we simply found no where new to graze them. I'm talking about thousands of attempts,pamphlets,walking the country roads knocking on doors,advertising,contacting about 5 rehoming places,only one of which even bothered to reply.Contacting the riding for the disabled,who also att least returned my calls. Fortunately in the end we managed to talk our way into getting more grazing at the place we already had some,but still we had to put down 2 very kind,inteligent,sensitive horses. the reality is,even if racing organisations said,hey,we will pay for rehoming all the ex racehorses,there would be no where to put the vast majority. i've made suggestiojhns on this forum,how i think they could take steps to address the problems,but i honestly think even idf there was a will,there is on;ly a way to mitigate the issue,it will never be solved. BUt they must at least try. i look at gavel horse,both the thoroughbred and the harness and i look at the value broodmares are currently being sold for. its really sad and so many seem to go unwanted. This is mostly people,trying to sell their horses at giveaway prices,to give them a new home instead of getting the pet food man out,but still no one wants them.People go through a lot of stress looking for homes. And even if you find homes,its still very expensive.Thats why some people like chief say,why bother,just send them to the pet food man as the outcome will be the same in the end.And hes right in a way. this is a topic where which is far more complex that the lady in the interview discusses. but at least shes trying,which is why i think she deserves support.

i agree with that,but believe its a good thing if people with horses do see them differently as curious says, because that way they have a better chance of a longer enjoyable life.And thats what i'm all for if possible. i get that everyones reality is different. I've never told anyone what they should or shouldn't be doing with their horses, on the contrary,i have been told many ,many times over the years i should dispose of our older horses Thats why, when you said to me,don't foist my opinions on you ,i thought,hang on,the opposite is actually true.its others who think like you who have tried to foist their opinions on me. I'm not saying you are trying to do that,but that is what i have had to listen from many others over the years. the dairy cows,in my ideal world they should be given a gradual stress free reduction in reliance on their mums,and they should a least be given the chance of life to the point where they would have been weaned by their mums had it occurred naturally..6 to 8 months of life seems a much better outcome than 4 days. Actually i go past some dairy farms each day and have observed how the mums look and behave. I get the impression its soul destroying to see their calves removerd after 4 days. Thats what they look like they are thinking to me.You would know that anyway.But hey that ain't going to happen,its unrealistic as farming is all about the money these days. I have known dairy farmers,who actually don't send their bobby calves away at 4 days old,simply because they don't feel comfaortable treating their animals that way. i'm not vegaterian,but only eat meat about 2 or 3 times a year. No chicken. just fish and veges these days..But each to their own. I never preach to anyone about not eating meat.personal choice is what i believe in.

i'm expressing my opinions,but i'm not foisting my opinions on anyone like you suggest. Read my comments and you can see that. i have no control over what you or others do with your ex racehorses or your dairy cows,nor want any input. i know your from a dairying background. dairy farming is an industry which i think has many negatives,but i realise thats just the way it is.it ain't going to change as they know how to make money and farmers are all about making money,like everyone else. you brought up the dairy industry. Now theres an industry that i really do believe has some issues. in my opinion,i think theres something not quite right with an industry with the common practice of sending 4 day old bobby calves off to slaughter. I have spoken to someone whose job it was to chase the wee calves into the area where they were slaughtered at the works. One day he told me he was so buggered as he had to carry more than normal to the appropriate area ,as the calves simply did not have enough energy to stand anymore,which he put down to the length of travel they had already endured.That bloke told me he had regular nightmares and was looking for another job as it just wasn't worth it,despite the good money he was paid. I've also in the past spoken to an english vet who came out to the local dairying region,to ply his trade,i also got to speak to him on the day he flew back to england. He cut his stay short and told me he was very much looking to going back to england as he felt conflicted in nz. He said he had become a vet to look after animals health,not to put a bolt through the head of days old bobby calves as he was being asked to do on such a large scale.He said nz dairy farmers,especially the corporates,were all about the money and being a vet in nz just wasn't for him.. But i realise thats just the way it is. Pragmatic you call it. It do get that,but i don't have to think its a good thing.

looks like what happened pre race did the trick today the horses in that race only arrived at the start point around 2 minutes prior to start time, then daisy diana was in the same pre race circle as the others for 1 minute ,then they put it on the mobile for the final minute. So it really didn't have much chance to misbehave like it normally does ,when its always been required to be on its own ,as its starting position is ur.Hey,well done to them.I hope that means they will do the same from now on. it will be interesting to see if they do.

i see this horse is pying only $1.95 to win in race 1 at gore. its failed to score up to the mobile in 4 of its last 5 attempts. why it wasn't stood down after doing so last startwas a real mystery.It appears they didn't do so because the previous start another horse who broke was blamed for the false srart, even though daisy diana hadn't scored up. its been veryvery lucky that they have called false starts so many times ,apparantly because they were worried about it getting in someones way when the field had gone a round.. obviously it is a good chance if it went away,but $1.95 for a horse with a 1 in 5 strike rate of going away?.

your just doing what you do again chief,just muddying the waters. the lady,in the interview, went into a detailed background of her involvement in rehoming and animal welfare, she referred to her experiences over years. when was the last time you talked to a pet food man about whats happening in the racing industry. when was the last time you had interaction with someone from the spca or hrnz over animal welfare, when was the last time you had tried to rehome horses,tried to find suitable grazing.etc,etc,etc. well i've personally experienced having to deal with all the shit that goes with that over time. discredit what this lady is saying or i am saying as much as you want. All yourcomments are doing is actually confirming what i'm saying,that you've got your head in the sand and are happy with the window dressing the industry puts on these matters. like it or not,this lady,has shown with the platforms she now has,that she has a degree of influence in the publics perceptions of the industry. i've never said people like this lady are perfect or that i fully agree with her..She gives me the impression that she may jump to conclusions too easily. But her heart is defintely in the right place .

i'm unsure what your actually trying to say. it appears you may be saying,people should be careful expressing opinions they honestly have,as if those opinions have similarities to opinions of someone else,then that creates a link for everything both people have said on a topic and to a degree what both persons have said about other topics. and you seem to be saying,one should place more importance to being careful,when one is agreeing with someone, who at times, has whats cosidered controversial views. is that what your actually are saying? if it is,isn't that just a clever way of you attempting to undervalue the opinions of those you may not agree with. really,this is a topic where opinions i think should be taken at face value.

look. if you read enough of what people post on here,you soon realise theres many contributors who see the animals in their care, as much more than just a commodity from which to earn $ and/or to gain enjoyment from.The likes of gammalite,curious,freda (they are the ones off the top of my head but theres others),who you just know would go the extra mile to do everything they could,almost seeing them as an extension of their family. .i don't know these posters personally,but you can just tell from their words. you can poo poo this ladies comments as much as you like and yes,i feel she has generalised a bit too much,but maybe thats what she has felt she has to do to highlight the issues shes raised. you make comments labelling some of my comments as conspiracy theories. I don't care when you do that. You have no idea my lifes experiences,nor do i have yours,but you really shouldn't suggest i don't know what i'm talking about on this matter. also,you always come across like a farmer who has desensitised himself from the aspects of farming which play on the minds of people like myself. And thats carried over into racing. And i believe that is also the same way the majority of people in racing operate as well. Its like people just think,well thats part of the industry,ts a problem with an answer beyond their control that can't be changed and they act as accordingly.And heres the sad thing,i admit theres elements of truth to that type of thinking. But thats not what we are talking about is it. What this lady and i are talikng abou tis there should be a duty of care for horses,not just up until they are finished as racehorses,but a duty of care throughout their whole life. i've acknowledged this ladies expectations are unrealistic,but i would still hope every person within the industry at least acknowleges where this ladies sentiments are coming from and at least give her thoughtsthe consideration they deserve.. and why should anyone feel threatened by what this lady has said. what does that tell you.I'm not. Thats all i'm saying.

I watched the interview in full and to be honest,my take is she is a very passionate lady who very clearly was speaking from the point of view,what is best for the welfare of racehorses,not whats best for the industry. and i can see nothing wrong with that whatsoever. people may well think she is over playing the very obvious negatives as relates to the topic she discussed. I certainly don't and i think she based what she said on known facts and experiences. i don't agree with her when she said you can''t be truly objective and support the industry. Thats not true as within the industry are so many people who can enjoy the industry,enjoy the horses and operate in a way that would satisfy this ladies concerns about providing reasonable life long care for their horses. I know i'm one.Its very costly though and you have to make persoanl sacrificies to operate like she wants. I would even go so far as to say,its an unrealistic ideal toexpect many to have. but i'm not a denier of what she says exists,because i know it does on a large scale. quite simply ,in my opinion,the topic is a very unfortunate part of the industry which is almost insurmountable.In other words,the world she wants to exist never will,no matter whether i want to see the same thing as her. lifes full of these contradictions,racing is no different.e.g.i used to have a bit of ground and bred to 200 ewes,,but stopped breeding them ,as after a few years i just couldn't wrap my head around the contradiction of farmers caring so much for their lambs,but then after 6 months sending them all to the freezing works.i found it easier to just graze the ewes and not breed. They lived to in their mid teens. But thats just me.So much in animal care is a contradiction. anyway,i find it very unfair some have chosen to criticise her as they have. why can't those people see her words match her actions.that gives her major credibilty to me. the fridge gas being used on horses,well i thought everyone in the harness industry knew rhar about 4 years ago. that got media coverage and of course the harness industry did all they can to catch the perpetrators. I had thought the much maligned riu did a good job in actually pursuing the people rumored to be doing that.some of those people were very dishonest and they caught a handful on other charges..Just look at the dishonest cheats tat they caught and you will find they were among those spoken about most as using what she said. at the end of the day,people need to accept,this lady is trying to be a voice for the horses>beautiful,intelligent,sensitive animals. And i think the horses and the industry need more people like that. the question the industry should never stop asking,is how can it address her concerns best.i know the racing industry tries hard,but personallyi think they still could do better. This lady is never going to go away,nor are the issues she raises.

i don't find it hard to believe at all. Nothing to be gained by lying. i'm assuming the reason for the big loss was it was one of the tab syndicate horses. that is a horse owned by entain.The syndicates were formed to give their members the experience that goes with owning a horse,without having to put any money up,nor did it say they get any back from stakes. if was widely reported they would be given things like ownership priviledges and of course with that goes the enhanced odds you can get when you bet at the tab on your horse.Those syndicates also said they have other different promotions each time a syndicate horse runs without specifyinbg what they were. i assume the tab offered all its members of that horse the opportunity to bet a certain amount on the horse at the odds which it was originally set at. I guess they didn't reduce the odds due them thinking it was unfair if the reduced the dividend members were getting om in a first in basis. all that about how they came to have such a loss on that horse winning, is just my guess at how it came to be. i believe the bookies gambled on it not winning and lost big time.

heres another point about that. the races with the big nz pools i mentioned from 20 years ago,i'm pretty sure they were not commingled pools.So that was nz punters betting on nz harness,in really big numbers.. the thing about when they introduced the comingling pools was nz punters,who weren't betting that much on australian racing,becuase the pools weren't big because of no commingling,then changed to betting on the aussie races instead of the nz races. then the tab,just kept increasing and increasing the numner of imported races . I remember when they started comingling they said they had about 15,000 imported raussie aces to bet on. Well these days don't they have well over 100,000 from all over. (Then of course theres the sports betting.). reality is the commingling created the reduction in nz punters money going to nz clubs,instead the % taken from the money bet for racing outside nz was redistributed to fund mostly australia,n but also other overseas racing. Actually,today you could have bet on races from mexico or turkey or puerto rico. so commingling caused nz punters to migrate from nz racing to overseas racing. Commingling was a seroius nail in the coffin,in having the nz publics focus taken away on nz racing. On one hand nz racing gained from the small % returned to the tab from overseas betting,but obn the other hand lost out on tyhe significant reduced nz betting and most importantly,commingled was the start of focus of nz punters on nz racing being lost. as they say,you better be careful what you wish for sometimes.

the punter backing on the telfers seems to back the better chances from that stable so maybe he does have some inside information and is the fella mentioned.i don't know. The tab bookies do make some stuff ups sometimes. Like they said on trackside last night they lost $100,000 on that first starter from the dalgety stable that won.. to do that the bookies must be big gamblers themselves. Like how could you allow such a big liabilty.It won't have been on one bet,it would have been lots of bets. Any normal bookie would not take such big risks and would just reduce the odds more as they got more bets. Like they reduce the odds when the wahle watch tips something and people back it,which is just common sense. HRNZ should demand the tab bookies on harness be paid on commission as losing $100,000 on one horse you would think would mean the meeting wouldn't run at much of a profit,if at all and very little be returned to fund stakes to that meeting. actually,this afternoon, i was looking at a handful of races from about 15-20 years ago and the videos had the tote pools going across the screen. The ones i saw,the win pools were all around $50,000 and the place pools around $30,000. And that was for just run of the mill races. Yet here we are,20 years later,win pools at the likes of auckland premier friday meetings are often around $3500 and addington around $7500. i know more is bet on ff these days,but going by the percentage mr steele said was tote and was ff,theres no way they are anywhere near as big as the total tote pools of just 20 years ago. Yet,here they are racing for double the stake money now,than when they were when more was invested its hard to make much sense of that when you think about it.

interesting take on things. How do we know its mr stockman punting on the telfer horses? maybe it is but wouldn't he want that kept private if he was. as brodie said,whoever it is has to be a losing punter otherwise the tab would restrict that person. also they highlight lots of big bets and you can tell some have to be from people who don't know that much, as they are backing horses at silly odds. As to tu tangata,i agree with you there. Whoever backs that horse these days or tips it,must be eternal optimists. i think i highlighted its record earlier this year on a bit of a yarn. Its one of those horses that has shown for its last 50 starts,in which it has only had 1 win,it adjusts its performances downwards,depending on the grade it runs in. el conqueror another like that from that stable. Really el conqueror and tu tangata should be driven by a claiming junior and once thay get back into that r 40 grade then they can do a buffy northstains and be cash flow machines. the biggest asset to the tab is the whale in my opinion.Not because hes not a good tipster,but because they market him in a way that encourages punters to bet on his horses at unrealistically short odds which they know will mean,in the big picture,they will always come out ahead. buffy northstains did look the winner i thought last night. But at $2.50 not that inviting.A horse that has won 15 races and over 200,000 ,running against 1-2 win horses ,it seemed a bit of a siitter. B negus has things sussed with that horse. Wins a race,gets the half penalties,so all it takes is 3 or 4 misses and its back racing the very same horses its proven time and again for the last 3 years it can beat.the key is the junior claiming driver and driving it quiet for the 3 or 4 runs after it wins,then drive it to give it a chance and ka ching,it will win again . i thought cormoran strike was a flop the week before like you gammalite and couln't have it on that run but it got the ideal run last night and maybe the form in the race the week before may have been stronger after all. dreams pat being tipped by the whale was a very strange tip. Its a horse that loves to break at least 3 times y every time. Its so consistent in being a breaker that no one could possibly tip it with any confidence,but the whale had it in his top 3 bets for the night. Really strange,but the tab must have loved seeing that.why it wasn't stood down again by the stipes was a mystery. actually dream pat is by father patrick.Horses by father patrick, i have posted many times,start off really good when 2 or 3,but then many seem to get some sort of mental issues and like to gallop or just be ignorant once they get to 4 or older.i seehis stud fee is only $5000 this year. i'm similar to brodie,in that i would rather pick something out on a sunday than a friday night,becuase i have more confidence about the form of the sunday horses,except for southland horses. I struggle to follow the southland horses these days due to so many drivers down there being inconsistent in their driving performances. Like down there you have the likes of r mcilwrick. Hes a driver who you simply have no idea what hes going to do.He mostly seems to have a pre race plan to get hopelessly placed and wait for next week,then after doing that about 5 or 6 times he will burst into life and drive them aggressively. Maybe its what he has for breakfast . anyway. i see you've mentioned bar louie in the kurow cup as a possible bet . Its now only paying $2 on fixed odds. To me thats a ridculous low price. Event the $3.20 it opened at seemed much too short.I'm not saying it can't win with the perfect run,just no one should back it at such short odds. And remember the telfer horses also have a lot that break in stands so thats even more of a risk. if i had $1000,which i haven't i would probably be backing bring on the muscle or passendale or maybe miles away. i think to make money you have to be backing horses that pay more than 2 or 3$.

air quality is something i've followed for a while now. Yes invercargill is in the worst couple in nz..Timaru used to have the worst air in australasia for quite a few years and i think its nelson that also has historically had poorer air qualty at times. people just don't realsie how air quality can impact their health down the track. I remember talking to someone once whose wife was in getting treated for lung cancer at 30,never smoked. He told me how doctors had told him they saw far more lung cancers from the 3 areas mentioned and believed it was due to air quality. all you have to do is look at the mortailty figures relating to unexpected premarute death rates and their was always a pattern for the cities with the bad air.. theres lots of reasons for air pollution. like invercargill was a lot to do with heating in the winter,auckland does have good air, their pollution was more to do with traffic and other areas it could be a combination of industrial or even the likes of a ship unloading cement into a silo at a port. but the point being,your lungs and your hearts can be effected by bad air. the thing i find strange about governments approach to air pollution is,they have allowed all this urban sprawl and that effects air quality. On one hand we had labour promoting selling off good farmland, which created jobs,instead prioritising the planting of trees,all the while allowing the continuation of urban sprawl. So much of what happens seems poorly though out. I see the farming sector are hoping the current government will see sense and pass a law stopping overseas companies buying up good farmland and using that as a big picture excuse to keep polluting in another part of the world. anyways,back to air quality,even if you drive into the likes of christchurch,say from halswell you see this soft gey cloud sitting the city side of the hills. Thats not good. gully type area are bad for pollution.It may not be the noticeable big brown cloud you get at a couple of the previously mentioned nz cities,but its there . and then you thow in the effects of covid and throw in the effects of the covid vaccine. i feel like fraser from dads army,we're doomed,all doomed. theres a cherry note to end my post on(,depending of course where you live)

yes the economy and housing obviously has flow on effects on everything,including racing. we all know the rich get richer and the poor are struglling more and more. Ain't going to change. people are lucky enough in nz to have the government top up payment of their rents if they have nothing and theres more and more of that going on because if you rent for a reasonable period of time,you just go through your savings as rents and just living is more than you get,unless in a well paid job. Then you get to the point where you have bugger all left and at that point the governmant will step and top up paying your rent. People in that position still only live week to week but at least the government allows them to have a roof over their heads and hopefully stay warm.there would be heaps and heaps of households in nz getting top ups of around $300 extra, just so they can pay rent and get basic food requirements.I don't think people realise just how desparate it is for many and how much the government is paying out to wealthy landlords. its a bit like people who go into rest homes here. They use up their savings or value of assets to a certain point,then the government starts paying for their rest home care. e.g. i think if your partner has died you are still allowed just under $300,000 and thats when the government start paying for your st home care. The government of course take any benefit you may be getting.if your above that you have to pay it yourself. it varies if both you and your wife are still alive and whether one or two needs care. sometimes the formula. But whats obvious is if you live any reasonable amount of time once you go into a rest home care,you go through savings quickly. it seems rest homes cost around $1500 a week these days,dependings where they are and the level of care. but the rest home thing is the same as the renting thing,the rich emply people like accountants or solicitors to work around things with things like trusts,so they get the full government subsidy right from the start.when it comes time. The rich get richer and average joe bloggs and their family get poorer. just the way it works. its like the government recently spent 50 million on uncovering benefit fraud recently underthe current government. They investigated uncovered benefit fraud of around 700,but only prosecuted 33. those 33 fraud only amounted to undert 3 million. That differs a wee bit from a labour union man who told me that recently the governemnt had spent 50 million and got back 50 million. i guess the difference being they didn't prosecute many that had been overpaid. but heres the thing ,the labour unuion man said the government could have spent far lesss or even the same investigating fraud of those who are wealthy and it was obvious from figures that they would have uncovered far greater fraud and overpayments,but the current govenmenyt chose to focus on those on benefites and not the people who vote for national or act. all thats just the way it is,the way the world works,and all it means is wealth is going into fewer hands and the bottom end struggle even more,even though they are lucky to get the handouts.

you have to give him points for trying. He seems to be making reasonable observations,even if we know its not a big picture take on things.

now i've actually posted about it,even if by mistake, i googled it and it was "the gambling man by kevin perkins.apparently he spent 22 years researching it before he completed writing it then another 10 years being sued for defamation before it was made available for publication. lots of stories in their,all supposed to be factual,that people didn't want being published. it was sort of based around bill waterhouse and his gambling dynasty. to quote the promo " it exposes the intrigue,treachory andskullduggery ivolved in the upper echelons of gambling,polished crooks in high places,mind blowing betting duels,the truth behind the fine cotton ring-in scandel and other fascinating stories". ive never been much of a reader myself,but that book would label the best book i have read. And it was all supposed to be true.based on fact. I remember the story about the head of one of australias biggest banks and how that all ended. That was a story and a half in how it ended and how close he came to the possibilty of it never being uncovered.. it was sort of a bit like that aussie series underbelly. Underbelly was about kings cross,the criminal underworld and police corruption during the late 1980's early 1990's. The book the gambling man had all that,bit with so so much more. The gambling man would have made a fantastic tv series. Maybe they didn' make it because they were afraid of all the litigation the the author had to go through.

actually didn't mean to post anything . Thought i was goggling the book ,the gambling man. I once had it but lost it somewhere in my travels. Its a wonder its was never made into an aussie tv series. It was a great read. gammalites post made me think of that book the gambling man,all about a period of time in australia involving the likes of the fine cotton scandel and a top aussie bank executive and all the other goings on around life and gambling at the time.g some big aussie bank persoexecuui sthe a.

yes,seems a positive move i suppose,but only on a small scale due to how they have limited it.Doesn't sound like it will help brodie much as he's said he prefers to do place bets Also, it only applies to friday night harness meetings,so i think people who post on bit of a yarn don't spend much on those nights anyway, as you have auckland meetings with the small fields which are a big turn off to punters and even addington has a lot of races which aren't attractive to the punter these days. i find it interesting they also have limited the increase for nz gallops to saturdays. That means if you follow the south island gallops,you wo'nt get that many opportunities either.

The people you appear to like calling the entain nah sayers,are the ones who have consistently said entains going to focus on increasing their profits from sports betting and to do that, obviously it should go without saying ,they would have to grow the revenue. so what you posted really does nothing whatsoever to discredit anything anyone has said about entains intentions or performance. In fact the contary is more applicable.. also,whats the breakdown % for sports and racing. And when it comes to harness racing,they have held many more meetinghs. Thats an obvious factor if their % went up.. and another obvious factor. We know betting agencies revenue is impacted negatively or positively,depending on whether favorites are winning any sporting contest. Just as their racing revenue can be effected by the same thing.i.e. more favorites winning or losing in say the nba ,nrl.anything with an n in it,means more or less revenue. And of course it depends what happened the year before,when you compare a year with the previous. anyways, i think it really would need further analysis as to the actual impact on nz harness racing,which is what we comment on when it comes to entain.

better tell him to stop gatecrashing nz rugby board meetings. Cheeky bugga.

actually just reading that bit again. i don't make stuff up as i never said he isn't a crusaders man to the core.He and his board at canterbury rugby stuck with rob penny,becuase,thats just the make up and thinking of canterbury rugby people. You don't throw a loyal servant of canterbury rugby to the wolves when the going gets tough..thats why they win so much.I liked that and hoped that would come through with his decision making when it came to canterbury harness racing,which is the heartbeat of the nz racing industry. But it hasn't and i don't think he really is in touch with the thinking of the people the industry is losing in canterbury. you have to judge people by their actions,not their words..Rugby and racing are two different industries.

your inferring i said something i didn't again. i never referred to the crusaders franchise. i was talking about the general population of christchurch and one eyedness. Theres no way the general population of canterbury is as one eyed as it used to be. Sure there will be pockets of it,but no way its as prevelant as it used to be. All i did was explain the reason for that was because so many people from other areas now lived there and the make up of the popiulation had changed due to immigration as well as migration within nz. all you haver to do is walk around some areas of christchurch. Where we currently live,the closest 10 houses would have no maoris,3 houses of white people,4 of indians,1 of filipinos and one of a middle eastern country that i cant quite work out what it is they are saying. the previous place we lived,surrounded by asians.,mostly chinese. the indians mostly rent like us. Some of the people who own their homes are quite rich going by what they have. If you think these people who come to canterbury in the last 10 years are 1 eyed cantabrians,your kidding yourself. Now i don't care either way what colour people are,but i can make an obvious observation. also i can tell you,not 1 says hullo if you walk past them.white or brown.Most never open there windows.Thats canterbury for you these days.